“Lebanon Debate”
In light of the ongoing escalation in southern Lebanon, signs of a remarkable shift in Hezbollah’s tactics are unfolding, indicating a deliberate transition from the traditional fighting style to more flexible and complex methods that keep pace with the nature of the current confrontation and the pressure of Israeli operations.
In this context, military expert, retired Brigadier General Marcel Baloukji, explained in an interview with “Lebanon Debate” that “Hezbollah modified its tactics on more than one axis,” noting that “the most prominent transformation is the use of drones linked to fiber optics, which contributed to changing the rules of engagement in terms of accuracy and the ability to hit targets.”
He adds, “The party no longer relies exclusively on traditional defensive positioning, but has moved to a more flexible fighting style, based on gradual harm and exhaustion of the opponent, without engaging in large-scale direct confrontations,” pointing out that “the goal is to achieve a deterrent balance through qualitative strikes, not through direct field control.”
At the level of deployment, Balukji points out that “the party is still benefiting from trenches and ground fortifications, which constitute one of its most prominent strengths, given the difficulty of dealing with them on the ground,” but on the other hand, he points out that “these sites have become more vulnerable to detection, which prompted it to adopt a combination of static defense at some points, and tactical movement at other points.”
As for the terrain, he confirms that “the rugged geographical environment in southern Lebanon is still a decisive factor in limiting the effectiveness of any ground advance,” explaining that “this nature complicates the movement of vehicles and gives a clear advantage to the forces that rely on ambushes and fortifications.”
In a related context, he reveals that “the party has redistributed its operational efforts, with a greater focus in areas such as Nabatieh, instead of some traditional border points,” indicating a redrawing of confrontation priorities according to new field data.
Regarding the political dimension, Balukji believes that “these tactical amendments are inseparable from the negotiation process,” considering that “the party seeks to complicate the field scene in a way that is directly reflected at the negotiating table, in light of its rejection of any formula that might impose new facts on the ground.”
He concludes by stressing that “the current confrontation is not heading towards a comprehensive expansion in the foreseeable future, but it remains open to deliberate rounds of escalation, within the framework of each party’s efforts to improve its position before any possible settlement.”
